Getting it into your agent
One page per mod, every tool's command on it. A separate URL per tool would split the same page into five that compete with each other.
npx agentmods add skills/junmystery/agent-guidance-python/regex-vs-llm-structured-textnpx skills add JunMystery/Agent-Guidance-Python --skill regex-vs-llm-structured-textgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/JunMystery/Agent-Guidance-PythonWrote this? Show the measurements
A badge with what this costs and how it scanned, read live from this page, so it follows the numbers instead of freezing them. Markdown for a README, HTML for a documentation site or a project page.
[](https://agentmods.dev/skills/junmystery/agent-guidance-python/regex-vs-llm-structured-text)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/junmystery/agent-guidance-python/regex-vs-llm-structured-text"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/junmystery/agent-guidance-python/regex-vs-llm-structured-text.svg" alt="Measured on agentmods" height="20"></a>What it costs to keep this loaded
Counted locally with the o200k_base tokenizer, which is exact for GPT models; Claude uses its own tokenizer and its counts differ. Treat this as one consistent yardstick across the catalogue rather than a bill. Prices are per million input tokens.
| Model | Per session | Once invoked |
|---|---|---|
| Fable 5.1 | $0.00038 | $0.01594 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00019 | $0.00797 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00008 | $0.00319 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00004 | $0.00159 |
Grade A, and why
regex-vs-llm-structured-text scanned grade A with 0 findings against 26 rules in 11 categories — prompt injection, anti-refusal, data exfiltration, privilege escalation, supply chain, agent snooping, system-prompt leakage, SSRF and excessive agency — measured 2d ago.
A static scan of the body, not an audit. Every finding is printed with the line that produced it so you can judge whether it matters here. A mod is markdown that instructs an agent; that is exactly why what it instructs is worth reading.
Nothing flagged
None of the 26 patterns this scan looks for appear in this file: no shell pipes, no recursive deletes, no credential paths, no hidden text, no instruction-override or anti-refusal phrasing, no agent-config snooping. That is not a guarantee, it is the absence of the things that are checkable.
This is a copy
95% identical to regex-vs-llm-structured-text — 9 lines differ, which has more behind it and is treated as the original. This page carries a canonical link to it rather than competing with it.
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 221 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Regex vs LLM for Structured Text Parsing
A practical decision framework for parsing structured text (quizzes, forms, invoices, documents). The key insight: regex handles 95-98% of cases cheaply and deterministically. Reserve expensive LLM calls for the remaining edge cases.
When to Activate
- Parsing structured text with repeating patterns (questions, forms, tables)
- Deciding between regex and LLM for text extraction
- Building hybrid pipelines that combine both approaches
- Optimizing cost/accuracy tradeoffs in text processing
Decision Framework
Is the text format consistent and repeating?
├── Yes (>90% follows a pattern) → Start with Regex
│ ├── Regex handles 95%+ → Done, no LLM needed
│ └── Regex handles <95% → Add LLM for edge cases only
└── No (free-form, highly variable) → Use LLM directly
Architecture Pattern
Source Text
│
▼
[Regex Parser] ─── Extracts structure (95-98% accuracy)
│
▼
[Text Cleaner] ─── Removes noise (markers, page numbers, artifacts)
│
▼
[Confidence Scorer] ─── Flags low-confidence extractions
│
├── High confidence (≥0.95) → Direct output
│
└── Low confidence (<0.95) → [LLM Validator] → Output
Implementation
1. Regex Parser (Handles the Majority)
import re
from dataclasses import dataclass
@dataclass(frozen=True)
class ParsedItem:
id: str
text: str
choices: tuple[str, ...]
answer: str
confidence: float = 1.0
def parse_structured_text(content: str) -> list[ParsedItem]:
"""Parse structured text using regex patterns."""
pattern = re.compile(
r"(?P<id>\d+)\.\s*(?P<text>.+?)\n"
r"(?P<choices>(?:[A-D]\..+?\n)+)"
r"Answer:\s*(?P<answer>[A-D])",
re.MULTILINE | re.DOTALL,
)
items = []
for match in pattern.finditer(content):
choices = tuple(
c.strip() for c in re.findall(r"[A-D]\.\s*(.+)", match.group("choices"))
)
items.append(ParsedItem(
id=match.group("id"),
text=match.group("text").strip(),
choices=choices,
answer=match.group("answer"),
))
return items
What this file has done since we first saw it
Hashed on every crawl. A supply-chain change to an agent config is a question of when, not whether, so the history is kept rather than the latest state alone.
- 2d ago First seen · 221 lines · 38 tokens per session scan A 1f4338a9d8ee
regex-vs-llm-structured-text is a skill published in the GitHub repository JunMystery/Agent-Guidance-Python (2 stars, last pushed 1mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 38 tokens to every session and 1,594 once invoked, about $0.0002 per session on Opus 5. A static security scan graded it A with 0 findings. It is 95% identical to regex-vs-llm-structured-text, differing in 9 lines, and is treated as a copy.
Other skills, from other repositories
n8n-agents
Design n8n AI agents the right way. Use when building or editing any @n8n/n8n-nodes-langchain. AI node — an AI Agent, LLM chain, Text Classifier, or Information Extractor — and whenever the user mentions AI agents, LLM with tools, tool calling, $fromAI, system prompts, agent memory, sessionId, structured/JSON output…
compress-prompt
Compress a Rosetta KB prompt artifact (skill · workflow · phase · rule · agent · template · generic) by stripping structural tautology and ineffective scaffolding while preserving every importance-bearing token. Use when the user asks to compress, shorten, tighten, densify, or reduce a prompt / skill / workflow /…
coding-agents-prompt-authoring
To author, adapt, review, and validate prompts (skills, agents, workflows, rules, etc.) with brief, contracts, and a validation pack.
prompt-decorators-usage
Use when a user's prompt would clearly benefit from a reasoning, structure, tone, or verification decorator - or when they ask "what decorators should I use?". Teaches when and how to suggest inline ::Name(params) sigils instead of repeating verbose prompt-engineering instructions manually.
orchardcore-ai-workflows
Skill for integrating CrestApps AI Services with Orchard Core Workflows. Covers AI completion tasks using profiles or direct configuration, Liquid prompt rendering, AI response workflow output, selectable workflow tools, and AI chat session lifecycle events for field extraction, session closure, and post-session…
orchardcore-ai-prompting
Skill for using CrestApps AI prompt files and Orchard Core AI profile templates. Covers feature-aware prompt discovery, AIProfileTemplate sources, module and AppData profile paths, prompt selection, and template rendering. Use this skill when requests mention Orchard Core AI Prompting, prompt templates, profile…